Do you avoid the bathroom if there is a transwoman?

[PeachyDaisy]

I’m going to an industry event next week and I know there will be a transwoman attending. Should I use the disabled bathroom to avoid an awkward encounter or just continue to use the women’s and hope not to run into them?

No

Of course you shouldn’t ignore people just because they have rare medical conditions. But neither should you use their conditions as part of an argument that trans identifying men should be allowed to access women’s spaces, on the grounds that it complicates matters. It really doesn’t.

I know. There are strange people in this world. I have changed many nappies. Never found it any sort of turn on or fetish. No feeling of euphoria, other than happy to have baby clean and comfortable. Then I read about that fellow in court who had a used nappy fetish. I have become aware of the fact that men can have fetishes or kinks in a way that women really don’t. Largely of a sexual nature, and they can escalate in a way that may become dangerous for other people, especially women and children.

As Hamlet says ‘"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy". It is good to become aware of the things of which people are capable, especially men as they commit most of the violent and sexual crimes.

Why are we yet again talking about DSDs when this thread started out being about a transwoman (somehwhat rhetorical question)?

Do you accept that these are anomalies though?

Anyway this thread is about a man using the ladies toilets. We do not need a massive derail about a rare medical condition and the hurt feelings of a long since departed (and possibly theoretical - I notice that pp has produced no evidence of the thread referenced) poster.

As I think we’ve agreed, DSDs are nothing to do with ‘trans’.

well I have a friend who is transgender 🏳️‍⚧️ so no I don’t avoid, but even she would agree not all ‘trans’ people are made equal, she transitioned very young so no probs for her gladly 💕

I’m not doing that though.
I don’t think that trans-identifying men should have access to women’s spaces.
I think DSDs and trans are separate issues.

If I understood her correctly, a pp unthread said she agreed in theory that those who have a type of DSD like CAIS (where people have a Y chromosome but outward female phenotype) should use the ladies if they wish, but she didn’t agree in practice that they could…because of the complications that would cause to trans/GC issues.

Basically the rise of trans ideology has led to discrimination against individuals with a DSD medical condition. That’s not okay imho.

Yes it’s strange isn’t it? I must take some responsibility for responding to the chastisement of women using clear language but some are very keen to spend lots of time talking about the claimed suffering of one individual. I think it will be good to move on.

Personally I won’t go anywhere near the ladies toilets if I thought a bloke was either already in there or looking like he was loitering and I warn my daughters likewise.

DH keeps a quiet eye when we are out and about - not at my request but because he knows what some men are like and doesn’t want them near us.

I’m not doing that though.

I’ll take your word for it. But the discrimination against the individuals you mention is a non-issue in the context of the situation posed in the thread title.

Oh was that the guy who hung around a nursery and put his soiled nappies in their bins?

Or one of the others? I also came across a cartoonist that stole people’s photos of their kids and made pornographic drawings based on them. He has quite a public profile I think.

we did have a TW there some days. One of my staff would not use that toilet the day he was there, which I found a bit odd given that other days she was happy to share with everyone [men and women]!

I can understand her, and would feel the same. I prefer single-sex toilets, but use mixed-sex ones when there’s no alternative. In the same way, if I need intimate health treatment I’d prefer a female practitioner, but I have no objection to a normal male one.

But a man living out his sex fetish is a totally different matter. He’s living his life around his fantasy, and I don’t consent to be a prop or an audience. As a survivor of numerous sexual assaults, I simply don’t want to be around men who centre their own sexual gratification at other people’s expense (mainly women and children).

It’s not a phobia. It’s a healthy awareness of male sexual entitlement. I am well aware that many sex predators seem normal and harmless in everyday life. But I’d be stupid to go along with one who is not even trying to hide his sexual obsession.

I haven’t pried into his fantasies, he’s openly displaying them, and as paraphilias tend to occur in clusters, he may well have other sexual kinks. Having read some of the stuff they post in online forums, I wouldn’t want him near me. All the more so if he insulted me and trampled on my rights by using women’s single-sex facilities.

Grimmer than that, wasn't he getting their soiled nappies OUT of the bins?

The boundary for single-sex spaces is based on the biological reality of sex, which is fundamentally determined by chromosomes at conception. A Y chromosome signifies the male biological path; it is the blueprint that results in the development of male gonads rather than a female reproductive system. While conditions like CAIS are rare medical exceptions in how a person looks, they do not change that person’s chromosomal reality. If we allow appearance or medical glitches to override the binary reality of XY and XX, the boundary for women-only spaces becomes subjective and unenforceable. To ensure the safety of women, we must maintain clear boundaries based on the objective fact of biological sex. If we make exceptions based on appearance or medical conditions, the boundary becomes subjective and impossible to enforce, which ultimately compromises the safety of women.

If we allow appearance or medical glitches to override the binary reality of XY and XX, the boundary for women-only spaces becomes subjective and unenforceable.

Well, not exactly, because there are XX males too (very rarely).

But it’s a disorder, not a natural extension of the xx chromosome?
Why do people insist on whataboutting rare disorders as though they give the lie to sex being binary? Stop it.

I don’t think it gives lie to the sex binary.
I know it’s a disorder.

Basically the rise of trans ideology has led to discrimination against individuals with a DSD medical condition. That’s not okay imho.

We are all trying to find where to draw the lines. At the moment, with the current vicious onslaught on women's and children's rights, many of us are setting out our lines more distinctly and more firmly than we might have done under other circumstances.

You, yourself, have said that you are prepared to 'discriminate' against some people with DSDs when it comes to sport. You are drawing lines too. You are struggling to square that with 'being kind'. That is all.

You are adding nothing new to the conversation and appear to be derailing for the sake of it now.

I didn’t start this discussion on DSDs @HenriettaSwanLeavitt. It was going for at least a day or more before I noticed it.
I agree it’s not the original discussion point but I’m simply replying to other posts on here, and addressing misconceptions as I see them. Obviously some will disagree with my point of view, others agree.

I don’t see the enforcing of strict guidelines for sport as discriminatory in any way. It’s about fairness.

I don’t see the enforcing of strict guidelines for sport as discriminatory in any way. It’s about fairness.

You have to discriminate to be fair. Just as sometimes we have to discriminate to preserve dignity, privacy and safety. Discrimination is not always a 'bad' thing.

No probs for HIM you mean. No consideration of women though.

Well, there are different meanings of the word. Discrimination is usually seen negatively though, and that’s what I thought you meant here. Distinguishing or differentiating might work better to avoid confusion.

Discriminate is the right word as it is not just about seeing differences, it means treating differently. In this case treating men and women differently through providing different toilets in order to maintain the safety, privacy and dignity of women and the privacy and dignity of men.

Ooh we’re onto the exact meanings of words.

”Share” was one that ran and ran.

But regardless of this, no men, however they identify, should be in women’s toilets or changing rooms. Or bathrooms, if you call them that, Heaven knows why.

Okay, it does have negative connotations as a word though in usual use. The word isn’t usually used when you are promoting fairness and justness.
(It’s fine, just easy to misinterpret is the problem.)

I missed that argument but when my DC where toddlers ‘share’ usually meant ‘give it to me’. Very similar to the way many adults cry ‘be kind’ when demanding we must do what they want.